User talk:65.95.158.79

June 2022

Hello, I'm Doug Weller. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Virgin Birth of Jesus, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. The source says Palestine, you can't change it because you don't like it. Doug Weller talk 13:45, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

The source does not say "Palestine" in reference to 1st century Judea. No historian refers to that territory of Jesus' time as "Palestine", since no entity existed at such a time and place. The only name for that territory in Jesus' time was Judea. That is historical fact, and how the source obviously calls the land of that time period. 65.95.158.79 (talk) 20:01, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I read the source. Also see Timeline of the name Palestine. Doug Weller talk 20:22, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The source uses Judea frequently, as any reputable historian of this time period would, because that is what all the available historical sources of this period refer to the land as (including all Roman ones). The only official name of the territory in the 1st century was Judea. Syria Palestina was never used by the Romans for this territory in any official or meaningful purpose until much later, after the Bar Kokhba revolt, as part of their collective punishments on the Jewish people. 65.95.158.79 (talk) 20:47, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Sources and parallels of the Exodus‎. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. This was simply vandalism as you deleted text saying it wasn't in the source, which shows you didn't check it as it was clearly there. Doug Weller talk 13:46, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Sources and parallels of the Exodus, you may be blocked from editing. See MOS:CLAIM Doug Weller talk 20:33, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Stop vandalizing Virgin Birth of Jesus. Per Timeline of the name Palestine, the name has been in use since the 5th centurty BC, and it translates an even older geographic name for the region. Judea is the name of a minor sub-region. Dimadick (talk) 05:57, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am not vandalizing that page. My edits do not meet the definition of vandalism. Please refer to my user account which I have created for further discussion. Furthermore, Judea is the ONLY name for the Roman province in the 1st century. There was NO official usage of "Palestine" in any sense during that time by any Roman authorities, and no place officially called "Palestine" between the Yehud Medinata, Hasmonean Dynasty and Roman Judea. Judea was the only name for the entirety of the Roman province. Fides2022 (talk) 22:05, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Changing sourced text because you don't like it is pretty obviously vandalism. Doug Weller talk 12:41, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I did not change sourced text in the article Virgin Birth of Jesus. And that is not vandalism. Making false accusations, or entering material with false attribution to a source which does not state the words being attributed to it (e.g. using the word "Palestine" for Roman Judaea), are examples of vandalism. Nice try though. 65.95.158.79 (talk) 23:23, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To edit, please log in.

Editing by unregistered users from your shared IP address or address range may be currently disabled due to abuse. However, you are still able to edit if you sign in with an account. If you are currently blocked from creating an account, and cannot create one elsewhere in the foreseeable future, you may follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Request an account to request that volunteers create your username for you. Please use an email address issued to you by your ISP, school or organization so that we may verify that you are a legitimate user on this network. Please reference this block in the comment section of the form.

Please check on this list that the username you choose has not already been taken. We apologize for any inconvenience. Doug Weller talk 06:04, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

65.95.158.79 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have not violated any Wikipedia regulations on editing. I did not vandalize any article. When an editing dispute arose, I ceased editing the article when realizing it was becoming an edit war. I also did not intentionally evade any bans and am not editing until this block terminates. Making a mistake while editing is not vandalism. If not able to be unblocked outright, I would then request a reduction in the block duration. Thank you. 65.95.158.79 (talk) 23:34, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Reading this user talk page shows that editors tried to raise concerns with you, but you ignored them. I am declining your request. PhilKnight (talk) 00:34, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

The mention of evasion is in reference to User talk:Fides2022. Johnuniq (talk) 03:13, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I mistakenly created that account before realizing this IP had received a block. I apologize for doing so, and I will adhere to the period of the block. I have no intention of block evasion via that account, or in any other manner. 65.95.158.79 (talk) 22:04, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address.